Difference between revisions of "Talk:LlSetObjectPermMask"
m (heading) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== {{Jira|SVC-3841}} == | |||
REQUEST: | REQUEST: | ||
| Line 5: | Line 6: | ||
Removing a level of permission restriction (or Adding Permissions) should be restricted to the CREATOR of the object, or inventory item within a prim. This would be MOST useful for large linkset objects with scripts in many prims (such as vehicles) | Removing a level of permission restriction (or Adding Permissions) should be restricted to the CREATOR of the object, or inventory item within a prim. This would be MOST useful for large linkset objects with scripts in many prims (such as vehicles) | ||
Adding a level of restriction would be most useful in the case of vendors, where the sale item would be required to carry at least the transfer permission, but the vendor might be instructed to remove the ability to transfer an item for the next owner. The scenario in which this would manifest itself is in a vendor owned by one avatar, and a remote warehouse of items owned by the merchant. | Adding a level of restriction would also be useful in the above scenario, but would be most useful in the case of vendors, where the sale item would be required to carry at least the transfer permission, but the vendor might be instructed to remove the ability to transfer an item for the next owner. The scenario in which this would manifest itself is in a vendor owned by one avatar, and a remote warehouse of items owned by the merchant. The merchant would allow the items to be sent to the vendor with a minimum of the transfer permission or the vendor can't operate. While I do see a workaround for this being the warehouse actually delivering the item to the buyer itself, it becomes cumbersome to make certain that alses, inventory and configurations are accurate in the vendor and would require more communications that are reported as "Not a reliable means of inter-region communication" that being prim to prim E-Mail ( https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-23 ) . Once an item is sold, the vendor may well be missing that item until an inter-regional message CAN get through, but that would be no trouble for the end customer. The vendor can simply report out of stock until the warehouse can be contacted to deliver a replacement. The vendor may then keep a sales comission before paying the merchant allowing people who don't have the resources, or a great number of items to sell to work off a vendor owned by someone else, rather than having to rent space in a high profile area themselves. | ||
I therefore see no harm whatsoever in the present owner's scripts being able to REMOVE permissions as it will risk nothing for the creator, and quite possibly help to protect their interests. | I therefore see no harm whatsoever in the present owner's scripts being able to REMOVE permissions as it will risk nothing for the creator, and quite possibly help to protect their interests.{{unsigned|Melany Lunasea|23:42, 15 February 2009}} | ||
:Please file this as an SVC feature request in the [[Issue Tracker]]. Lindens won't take notice of it here...<br>[[Image:Zai_signature.png|45px]] '''[[User:Zai Lynch|Lynch]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Zai Lynch|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Zai Lynch|contribs]])</small></sup> 23:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Thanks ... done {{unsigned|01:04, 16 February 2009|Melany Lunasea}} | |||
:Welcome =) added it to the article. [[Image:Zai_signature.png|45px]] '''[[User:Zai Lynch|Lynch]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Zai Lynch|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Zai Lynch|contribs]])</small></sup> 01:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:29, 15 February 2009
SVC-3841
REQUEST:
Please Un God-Mode this thing with a few caveats:
Removing a level of permission restriction (or Adding Permissions) should be restricted to the CREATOR of the object, or inventory item within a prim. This would be MOST useful for large linkset objects with scripts in many prims (such as vehicles)
Adding a level of restriction would also be useful in the above scenario, but would be most useful in the case of vendors, where the sale item would be required to carry at least the transfer permission, but the vendor might be instructed to remove the ability to transfer an item for the next owner. The scenario in which this would manifest itself is in a vendor owned by one avatar, and a remote warehouse of items owned by the merchant. The merchant would allow the items to be sent to the vendor with a minimum of the transfer permission or the vendor can't operate. While I do see a workaround for this being the warehouse actually delivering the item to the buyer itself, it becomes cumbersome to make certain that alses, inventory and configurations are accurate in the vendor and would require more communications that are reported as "Not a reliable means of inter-region communication" that being prim to prim E-Mail ( https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-23 ) . Once an item is sold, the vendor may well be missing that item until an inter-regional message CAN get through, but that would be no trouble for the end customer. The vendor can simply report out of stock until the warehouse can be contacted to deliver a replacement. The vendor may then keep a sales comission before paying the merchant allowing people who don't have the resources, or a great number of items to sell to work off a vendor owned by someone else, rather than having to rent space in a high profile area themselves.
I therefore see no harm whatsoever in the present owner's scripts being able to REMOVE permissions as it will risk nothing for the creator, and quite possibly help to protect their interests.—The preceding unsigned comment was added on 23:42, 15 February 2009 by Melany Lunasea
- Please file this as an SVC feature request in the Issue Tracker. Lindens won't take notice of it here...
Lynch (talk|contribs) 23:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks ... done —The preceding unsigned comment was added on Melany Lunasea by 01:04, 16 February 2009